hatari Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 Hi, new to forum. Apologies if this is in the wrong section as I'm not a coin collector. I hope one of you may be able to assist me in this matter. I recently came across a Falklands one penny in the form of a locket and wonder if one of you may be able to clarify if it is original. I don't expect it to be of much or any value but I thought it to be quite interesting at the time as I had never seen one before. I tried to take as decent a photo as possible of the front and rear of the coin. I did a bit of research online and if it is original consider it to be the type 1 bronze coin. However, I'm unsure as to it's authenticity. At the time of purchase I was slightly unsure, but I can't imagine someone forging a low value relatively recent coin. The front of the coin is quite worn which gave me some doubt's and is dated 1982. The rear states 1980 which is somewhat confusing and does not read 'Queen Elizabeth the second' as I have seen on other examples. The edge is smooth and plain which seems to be correct but I'm not sure if this is the coin edge or the setting edge. Did this coin ever come out in a locket form or did someone have this done themselves as I assume? Any clarification would be appreciated, purely out of interest. Many thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art1.2 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 Hello and welcome to CoinPeople. I have no idea about the origins of your locket. My quick guess would be that the coin was manufactured by someone from two different coins. I know it seems strange but I have a US Nickel that has been cut in half and attached to create a two-tailed coin. I'm thinking this is a similar process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatari Posted July 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 Hi, thanks for your speedy reply. That seems probable, although strange to think that someone would go through all that trouble to split a low value coin when they could do it with a single coin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art1.2 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 Hi, thanks for your speedy reply. That seems probable, although strange to think that someone would go through all that trouble to split a low value coin when they could do it with a single coin. I agree. BUT people do what people do. The nickel I recently found is a Jefferson probably mid 60s to mid 70s and in g-vg condition. It is beautifully split in half and reconnected. Almost no visible seam and it is almost perfect in width and weight. Practice perhaps for something of more value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccg Posted July 16, 2014 Report Share Posted July 16, 2014 This piece is not made from a coin. The reverse (side with penguins) appears to have been copied from an actual coin through casting, with the reproduction being rather shallow in depth. The obverse (side with the Queen) is completely made up. The font/location/size of the legend (inscription) is easily recognizable by anyone regularly familiar with British Commonwealth coinage as incorrect, though the portrait is actually very well done. (It's possible they were able to get a relatively good casting of the queen, but not the text, and so made some up) Jewelery made with imitation coins (usually goldtone) were very popular in the 1960s-70s, with a bit of a revival in the late 1990s and into the 2000s. Queen Elizabeth II is often a favourite, with depictions ranging from very faithful to outright cartoonish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatari Posted July 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 16, 2014 Hi, thanks for your detailed and knowledgeable reply. It's more obvious to me now that you break it down. It still seems bizarre to me that someone would go through this laborious process to create something that could be done with an original low value coin but I guess most of these counterfeits are produced in China where time and labour are very cheap. Interestingly, I came across some silver dollars at a market a few months ago and thought them probably too good to be true. I did quite a bit of research before I went back to look at them and obviously they were poor quality fakes. My point is I can understand people faking valuable coins but understand less so with low value coins. I wonder if someone can clarify, with older original coins is there normally a lot of wear to the coin or are the details commonly so strong that the design is still well defined. What I mean is, if you see say a two hundred year old coin and it is very worn, is this a sure sign of a fake or can coins legitimately be in this condition? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YeOldeCollector Posted July 16, 2014 Report Share Posted July 16, 2014 The obverse (side with the Queen) is completely made up. The obverse is not completely made up. The simple divider here is the obverse. The obverse of a genuine Falklands penny would look like this: Your coin is modelled upon an ordinary UK penny, as seen here: The biggest difference is the legends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.